Lawyers differ on sex assault suspect's intent

A young woman awakens after 3 a.m. in her bedroom with a naked man standing beside her bed. She screams. They tussle. The man ? holding his clothing in one hand ? takes off her pajama bottoms.

There is no other reasonable explanation for what the man intended, prosecutor Tashawn Sanders told jurors in the man?s trial Wednesday, except that he was trying to sexually assault her.

On the contrary, argued Jaime Hernandez-Gonzalez?s attorney, Bill Marioni. The fact that Hernandez-Gonzalez had no plan, no weapon, no restraints and severely restricted his movements by hanging onto his wad of clothes shows he didn?t form the legal intent to commit a sex crime.

The difference is crucial for the young man, who has no criminal record.

Hernandez-Gonzalez, 24, of Occidental is facing a life prison sentence if convicted of the primary charge against him: assault with the intent to commit a sex crime during a burglary. He is also charged with two misdemeanors of evading and resisting police during his arrest.

Jurors can consider lesser charges such as simple assault and attempted rape, which carry sentences of four years or less. In contrast, a completed rape with serious injury to the victim carries a maximum term of 11 years in prison.

Hernandez-Gonzalez is charged with a crime for which punishment was lengthened as a result of the 2006 California ballot initiative dubbed Jessica?s Law that revamped sex-crime prosecutions. The crime now carries a mandatory life sentence, with the possibility of parole.

The attorneys presented their opposing theories to jurors during closing arguments Tuesday, capping a weeklong trial before Judge Gary Medvigy.

Hernandez-Gonzalez is accused of sneaking into a rural Cotati-area home on Dec. 22, 2007, and trying to sexually assault a 21-year-old female resident as she and a 20-year-old friend slept. Neither woman was hurt in the incident.

During testimony last week, the woman, identified in court only as Jane Doe, and her friend both identified Hernandez-Gonzalez as the stranger they saw standing naked in their upstairs bedroom, grasping a wad of clothes in one hand.

They testified that they saw a strange vehicle following their car as they returned home about 1:30 a.m. after being out in Petaluma that night. Concerned about the out-of-place car on their dead-end street, they let the car pass them before they pulled into their driveway.

Shortly after going to sleep, the women testified, the 21-year-old awoke to a naked man standing over her bed.

?I jumped up on top of my bed and started yelling ... ?get out, help,?? she testified. ?I went down on my butt to start kicking him.?

As she resisted, the man pulled off her boxer-short pajamas and underwear, the woman testified. She ran from the house, the man and her friend following. The women ran back inside, grabbed butcher knives from the kitchen, locked themselves in a bathroom and called police.

Soon after, Cotati police arrested Hernandez-Gonzalez a short distance away. Police testified that when he was arrested, Hernandez-Gonzalez?s pants were unfastened, his belt was unbuckled and he wasn?t wearing underwear.

The victim identified Hernandez-Gonzalez as the man who assaulted her and his car as the one she saw following them toward the house. She said she had never met him.

Sanders argued to jurors that despite Hernandez-Gonzalez?s inability to complete any sexual act, he is guilty as charged.

?He says, ?I didn?t do what I could have.? That doesn?t negate the criminal conduct. He says, ?I wasn?t good at committing a crime.? That doesn?t negate the criminal conduct,? she said. ?Whether he was bad at it or good at it, the crime was committed.?

Marioni acknowledged the humiliation and fear the young women felt ?as a result of Jaime?s stupidity.?

?There is no question that Jaime committed some crimes at that time and place,? he told jurors. ?But I don?t believe the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Jaime is guilty of count one (the assault with intent to commit a sex crime).? He countered that the evidence ? including testimony from the women ? supports his argument that Hernandez-Gonzalez didn?t intend to sexually assault the women.

Both women testified that Hernandez-Gonzalez didn?t behave violently, acting even ?zombie-like? or appearing vacant or ?comatose,? even when they screamed at him.

He told police that he was confused and desperate, dealing with ?frictions? at home and work.

?Jaime Hernandez-Gonzalez doesn?t have the heart of a rapist,? Marioni said.

By law, jurors are not to be told of potential punishments, nor are they to consider possible penalties during their deliberations.

Hernandez-Gonzalez is being held at Sonoma County Jail on $540,000 bail during the trial. Immigration officials also have placed a no-bail hold on him.

Jurors will begin deliberating the case today.

You can reach Staff Writer Lori A. Carter at 568-5312 or lori.carter@pressdemocrat.com.